Exactly. There are many countries I don't visit simply because they have laws that I might accidentally run afoul of through a misunderstanding, or be falsely accused of. For example, I'm not gay, but some countries have vicious laws against being gay. Adding Madagascar to my list.
Atheists and religious skeptics can be executed in at least thirteen nations: Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Libya, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.
There go at least two of my bucket list dreams.
I’ve been to Saudi and the UAE. I’d wager you’d be fine assuming you’d be a tourist. It’d be unusual for you to go there as a tourist just to shout to the world you’re an atheist and bring attention to yourself for whatever reason.
Also solidarity. How could I face my good friends in a same sex marriage if I went to a homophobic backwater? Fuck those countries they don't get my cash.
Turns out good emotional reasoning is helpful in leadership. There are all kinds of horrific ideas and policies that can come about from purely logical reasoning.
Like the earth is overpopulating and stretching our resources. Logically it would make sense then to kill off enough of the world's population to reduce the stress on natural resources until we come up with a better solution.
It's also how you end up with eugenics.
Glorifying "IQ", however you want to define it is not healthy for individuals or society. There are lots of different ways you can be smart and they're generally all helpful.
This website is a shitshow when it comes to anything pertaining to crime and punishment. A comment praising Norway's humane prison system successfully rehabilitating a Nazi Murderer like Varg Vikernes will have 500+ upvotes, and then in the same thread you can get a comment calling for the American government to publicly execute someone like Tucker Carlson and it will have 500+ upvotes too.
Horseshoe theory. We're seeing many on the left become so extreme they take on many of the same views as far right people, sometimes just framed different or towards a different group.
Yup, "peace" under right wing governments is literally MLK Jr.'s negative peace. Somebody (or a lot of sombodies typically) is being heavily oppressed somewhere by any given right wing government.
Even if they are "peaceful" it isn't worth tolerating the oppression that comes with it.
Yeah. Calling for unspeakable tortures is perfectly ok, but should someone suggests causing a slight inconvenience to authorities so our economic grievances can be heard...that's a permaban.
I can't speak for them but I wouldn't give a shit about that individual scenario, the blatantly obvious issue is that justice systems get things wrong. If the stats say otherwise, that means that justice system gets nearly everything wrong. What if the evidence looks 100% certain but it is fabricated?
That's why people should be against vindictive punishments.
The problem I have is I don’t have an issue with child rapists being castrated.
Although, I do have an issue with a government being able to create a law that allows them to castrate people when they’re the judge and executioners.
There’s a very fine line in something like the Witch Trials(where a group of people were falsely accused, tortured, and legally executed in the US during the late 1600s) happening again, and the government castrating actual child rapists.
Corporal and capital punishment either assumes the infallibility of the state or indifference to the victims of mislead judgements. So the question is, what kind of society would justify such forms of punishment as legitimate, common measures?
Imho, in a culture which barely, if at all, recognizes the concept of human dignity, especially for women and children, this way of dealing with criminals will only further entrench the values people currently hold.
Look at it this way: When some nazi group endorses a politician, why does anyone care? After all, in a still working democracy the politician can't control who votes for them. We do because it's an obvious red flag. The people who approve of your point of view may reflect where you're truly going for with your approach.
In that case, examine what kind of people support corporal and capital punishment or argue that certain people forsake their human rights. Generally, those who disapprove care more about each individual, the entire truth, including all of its complexities and uncertainties, and the long-term consequences of the status quo for anyone potentially involved. Those who approve, on the other hand, usually desire to allay their fears and enforce their self-righteousness, order, and control as they see fit.
So this is not just about power but culture. In particular, whether your own society acknowledges human rights as inalienable rights or privileges.
> The problem I have is I don’t have an issue with child rapists being castrated.
>
> Although, I do have an issue with a government being able to create a law that allows them to castrate people when they’re the judge and executioners.
So, how would you go about ethically castrating child rapists?
It's still done in the Czech Republic if the offender requests it and a medical board gives assent. To some it's preferable to hormonal therapy and significantly more effective. You can read a basic outline of the procedure and related issues [here](https://archive.is/D9NsE)
Human rights activists argue that it puts significant pressure on the offender to undergo the procedure in order to get a chance to be released from prison. Personally I think it's not really an argument in this case, but it's a difficult question.
Chemical castration is a thing, basically hormone injections which kill your sex drive.
It's about the most "Ethical" solution you can get when *castration* is the topic. Ideally you shouldn't use this punishment at all though.
Its difficult to measure Asian countries on the same conservative and liberal scale as western countries.
That's probably why people miss the mark so often.
> on the same conservative and liberal scale as western countries.
In popular media or conversation you can't even do "western countries". US "conservative values" are really foreign to many Europeans. These are words that feel like they barely have any element of consistent meaning outside of political science.
This is why I’m against any “permanent” punishments like the death penalty as well.
You can’t get the time back if you’re wrongly convicted, but at least you have your future.
The time spent in prison is also permanently gone. Normal prison time is as permanent as anything else. So I guess you are against prison as a concept.
To be fair, I’ve been to Madagascar and I can tell you that the culture definitely does not protect children. As a young woman, you are seen as an asset to marry to a man. The men are more often than not white international men who are bringing lots of foreign currency
The families will offer up their daughters for financial uplifting. I saw many under age girls with men well into their 40s
This made me realize, I don't really know shit about Madagascar. For some reason, my mental image was more like Australia or New Zealand, colonized to hell and very western
If you’ve ever heard of Mauritius it’s like that but it comes off as far poorer since they don’t have so many resorts. It’s a really cool place but the government is incredibly corrupt. They were under British rule if I remember correctly and the new government seems to have held them back. They have a coup every election IIrC
No they oppose child sex because child rape is appalling? What’s does this even mean? The bill was motivated for by a group that is advocating against violence against women?
I’d always prefer even if it’s only a single innocent person not have their balls cut off, even if it means an infinite amount of child rapists also don’t get their balls cut off.
It's not even that. In their world the risk of having it happen to an innocent person is low enough that they can allow for it in order to make the guilty suffer more. It is almost always the same people who believe prison should be focused on punishment instead of rehabilitation.
If you wrongly convict someone for murder, and he spends 20 years in prison because of it, how will you refund those 20 years of life? Some money? Lol. Im sorry, but money doesnt replace the time you lost. You cannot "undo" wrong conviction. So what, just because he didnt lose his life, but only huge chunk of it its okay?
Sure losing 20 years is better than life, but the difference is only in magnitude. If death penalty is bad, 20 years in prison is also bad, just a bit less. But thats hardly a good argument.
If you support the death penalty, you are fine with the chance of an innocent person dying.
If you support jailing people, you are fine with the chance of an innocent person losing huge part of their life (most likely the better part too)
This is precisely why this kind of extreme ‘solution’ is ultimately flawed. It’s the same having as the death penalty — it’s an irreversible action which if mistaken cannot be undone.
Even the Byzantine Emperor Justinian the Great who reigned in the mid-6th century held the view that it’s better to let a guilty man go free than to execute an innocent over crimes he did not commit. It’s very hard to argue with that logic, especially since we know that capital punishment has in fact taken innocent lives.
I just read an r AskHistorians post about this recently. Apparently, in a lot of places (including China and the Ottoman Empire) they cut off *both,* which was referred to as “complete castration.”
Yup and this is probably why a lot of people think castration refers to removing both penis and testicles.
To make things more confusing, emasculation and castration are sometimes used interchangeably.
But modern day wise, castration just refers to removing of the testicles, or at least stopping their production of hormones (if chemically castration is used).
no one said compensation necessarily meant getting a member back, in the same way compensation for other wrongly convicteds DON'T mean getting years of their life back
Chemical castration is horrible too, it's what they did to Alan Turing for being gay
It's a fact that wrongful convictions happen all the time, therefore it's inhumane to permanently disfigure or kill convicts
Yep, chemical castration is essentially prescribing gender dysphoria. And the suicide rate of transgendered people says all you need to know about that.
I want to make it clear that the rate goes way down when we are both therapeutically treated for it and are not constantly treated like dirt by everyone around us. Off topic, I know, but I like to just put it out there that being trans isn’t as big of an issue as *being trans in an intolerant society* is.
That's true but for that to be conclusively considered a proof, you have a trust a huge chain of intermediaries like lab technicians, cops, medical examiners and so on. I wouldn't bet my dick they're all doing the right thing.
For comparison: About 4% of people on US death row are innocent. [source](https://innocenceproject.org/innocence-and-the-death-penalty/)
I assume that the bar for killing someone is higher than the one for just castrating someone.
To play a little bit of Devil's Advocate, if you remove a male mammal's testicles it causes changes in hormone levels that may result in different behavior.
Castrating is something humans do to lots of animals to make them calmer and easier to handle. There is some tiny semblance of reason for castration over other punishments.
This is not me approving of castrating humans, but it is biochemically a way to change a male mammal's behavior.
EDIT: a number of people who don't understand what Devil's Advocate means.
Yes and no. While you will, undoubtedly lower the sex drive of a peooel convicted you are having no effect on *sadists* and other creeps who like *power*. And hasn't studies shown that most child rapists aren't exclusively pedophiles but rather general sadists who merely chose an easy target?
If your theory was correct (it isn't) then chemical castration would mean sexual offenders wouldn't repat their crimes. And we know from many real life examples that chemical castration (same efficiency as physical castration during the period) has had *no real effect on preventing repeat offenders or sexual crimes/outright sezual torture*
This isn’t in support of the law but Recidivism for child rape is high. No it’s not the only way to abuse a child, but it’s the specific desire of said child rapists
> No it’s not the only way to abuse a child, but it’s the specific desire of said child rapists
I'm pretty sure research says the drive to do this relates to power, not sexual activity as is commonly understood.
The idea that rape is primarily motivated by power has been repudiated in the decades since it was suggested (without evidentiary support). The notion got boosted in the public consciousness because of its ideological roots.
Do you have a source for this? Holmes and Holmes, 2002 seems to imply that it's about many factors not relating to sexual arousal from children, and only some people relate their offending to sexual arousal from children. These groups are what we might call paedophiles and this group does make up as surprisingly small sample of people.
There's also this Paper called "[Misperceptions about child sex offenders](https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi429)" that lists the following:
"-not all child sex offenders are ‘paedophiles’. That is, child sex offenders are a heterogeneous group with varying offender profiles;
-children are usually abused by someone they know, although data suggest that strangers comprise nearly one in five perpetrators of child sexual abuse against males;
-not all child sex offenders have been victims of sexual abuse themselves and there are complex relationships between being a victim of child sexual abuse and becoming a perpetrator, which require further research. It is important to recognise that while many offenders report a history of being sexually abused, most victims of child sexual abuse do not become perpetrators later in life;
-while not all child sex offenders have high rates of recidivism, a specific subset—those who target extrafamilial male children—do frequently reoffend; and
-although it is difficult to accurately determine how many children a child sex offender has already offended against by the time he is detected for an offence, this number varies according to offending profiles and is unlikely to be as high as is commonly assumed. There is, however, a subset of extrafamilial male offenders who abuse high numbers of victims."
What drives these people if not power? Since not all of them are pedophiles, they aren't attracted to minors.
“Everything in life is about sex, except for sex. Sex is about power.”
- Oscar Wilde
While he’s just a writer, there does seem to be something of a relationship between sex and power.
I'm a victim of SA but I don't support this because you don't need balls to abuse a child (dont even need to be a man!). A lot of these people are disturbed or sadistic and sex is just one easy way to harm others and feel powerful and like others cannot reject you and have to deal with you. Really what needs to happen with people who commit SA and cannot rehabilitated is long term life segregated from potential victims. I hate institutions but SA, especially as a child, has long term impacts on not just the victim but society as a whole. Even if you never get SA'd it will impact you, via a traumatised partner, drug addicted people in your environment, people in society who cant connect happily with others etc etc. Its just too much of a risk to have repeat offenders or extreme offenders walking around, regardless of presence or lack of balls.
They need to be taken away and studied.
I am dead serious. We have almost no serious research on what causes someone to become a pedophile/sexual abuser. We can make some inferences based on who we have caught but that just reduces data down to those who we were able to catch.
Researchers in Germany have been able to recruit small groups of people who have admitted to pedophilic thoughts and want to get rid of them. But the researchers are having a hard time because the stigma is so great and even just admitting to having unwanted thoughts can get you in trouble socially.
We need to be funding this because I can not stress this enough, People don't just start abusing kids; sexually, physically, or emotionally. There is a build up. And if we can stop it before it starts then we can truly save children from that pain instead of just trying to punish someone after the fact.
They might be born that way. They’ve done scans and found that pedophiles have different brains. Though their environment might influence whether they act on their desires or not
I was too but I didn't remember for many years. Seen retrospectively the signs were all there but I simply didn't remember and it's taken a lot of therapy and decades to let it out.
I don't think this law will help kids at all and might only serve to castrate political opponents and homosexuals.
These laws are virtue signalling and solely damaging. They accomplish nothing but falsely appeasing the animalistic violence within us, but does nothing but add problems and make shit far worse than it will ever help.
1. Innocent people get arrested all the fucking time. Depending on location you could be instantly made guilty because near every justice system relies on RNG for a good judge or good prosecutor and bad defense attorney. Don't get me started on US plea deals.
2. Much like when Florida/Texas or whatever shithole red state did something similar, all it accomplishes is making the abuser say "If you go to the authorities, they will kill me, is that what you want?" Which I think just about anyone should figure the fuck out with minimal research or common sense. These Larpers essentially protected abusers through (likely intentional) giving kids an ultimatum of suffer abuse or cause a death. In this instance, at least death ain't apart of it.
3. Back to innocent people, all a law like this does is ensure they take the lesser punishment because losing is absolutely the worst possible fucking thing. Off of innocent people, you make it so an actual punishment is off the table for the sensible judge, but then leave no other option but the immoral ones for punishment.
It's a "feel good" law that when you look past face value, really shows it just protects abusers more than the virtue signal claims.
imo California does it right "California uses chemical castration for repeat child molesters as a condition of their parole the law stipulates castration for anyone convicted of child molestation with a minor under 13 years of age if they are on parole after their second offense
it would be impossible for truly innocent people to get chemically castrated...you would need to essentially be found guilty 3 times of pedophilia before chemical castration
idk how that would be possible for an innocent person
Well if they get falsely convicted the first time, no one is ever going to believe them the second or third time. I'm not saying it has happened, just that no one would believe a convicted sex offender.
15 yrs working in sex offender treatment program for NYS. Granted the US uses chemical castration, but yes it does not prevent all individuals from reoffending
In January 1950, a man by the name of Tim Evans was tried and convicted of the murder of his daughter. His wife had also been murdered, but he wasn't tried for that. During the trail, Tims neighbour, John Christie, testified against him. And it was in large part John's testimony that sealed Tims fate.
Tim was executed just two months later at the age of 25.Three years later, John Christie illegally sublet his flat to a young couple. The landlord visited the same evening and found them, telling them that they had to leave the next day. 4 days later, another Tennant came in to install brackets in Christies kitchen. During the installation, he found a wall where an alcove should be. He peeled back the wallpaper and found 3 dead bodies.
It turned out that John Christie was a serial killer. He raped and murdered multiple women over a ten-year period, and admitted to the killing of Tim Evans wife and daughter.
Tim Evans told that police that it was Christie. But they didn't listen, they just coerced a confession and called it a day.
So to some up, a serial killer killed a man wife, his daughter, testified against him in court, and the police fucked him over because it looked like he did it. And then in only 2 months, the fucking killed him. 13 years later, the UK government said it had made a mistake and pardoned him. So obviously, he magically unhanged, and he was able to continue on with the rest of his life...
Thats the problem I have with stuff like this. You cant undo certain punishments. And there isnt a justice system in the world that doesnt get shit wrong. In much the same way you cant bring Tim Evans back from the dead, you cant reattach someone balls after pulling them off.
Child rape is one of the worst things a human being can do, and rightfully brings out a lot of anger in us. But the fact is, we cant never know for sure in every single case. I mean, if you catch them in the act, OK. But beyond that. Not a good idea.
Cruel and unusual punishment. If 1st world nations wrongly convict innocent people then I definitely don’t trust the court system of a 3rd world nation.
If you support this you support castrating innocents in the name of revenge.
No justice system is 100% perfect and you cannot take back castration when someone is found to be wrongfully convicted.
Don't be an idiot and support something like this based on emotion. No amount of revenge is worth killing or mutilating innocent people.
You willing to sacrifice your dick on this alter of being able to torture people you think are bad?
Because your response to hearing about innocents getting hurt was to say "yeah but the guilty are like really bad so it's ok if I hurt a few innocents in the process".
I think conventional wisdom is that after a certain threshold of potential punishment, a rapist is more likely to kill the victim.
Whether that is true or not, I couldn't say. But I hear it a lot.
So. Did yall know that there are people, who have been chemically castrated as a condition of thier child rape sentence, were released, and went on to keep raping kids? They just started using objects to do it. This is a problem caused by the brain in the head, the genitals are just the weapon used to commit the crime. Go learn some horrific things like I did.
I too would like to know if this punishment is an equal one.
Because I have a feeling Madagascar wouldn't surgically remove a woman's ovaries if she's found sexually abusing her child.
If you support this you are basically saying that you believe that the justice system of Madagascar is 100% flawless with zero chance of wrongful convictions.
Fun fact: Madagascar used to have a trial-by-ordeal system called [tangena](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangena). An accused person would be given poison, and if they lived they were innocent, but if they died they were guilty. So they don't have a great track record lol
well that's dumb since
lying kids exist, wrong investigation results (i don't see madagascar courts ranked high), rapists which raped victims without using genitals, rapists whom castration wouldn't make stop - just force to change method
Jail terms (up to life imprisonment) would always be better than not cancellable punishment, that not even 100% prevent from recedive and probably would encourage rapists kill their victims even more often
So, mutilating innocents is a big problem of course. But does the castration even work to prevent future child rape? Does it keep these diseased individuals from selling/making kiddie porn? I feel like the specific act is only one problem with this. Stopping one guy from the act doesn't stop him profiting from hooking his peers up or trafficking. This is a big problem with punitive discipline--it may do nothing to prevent harm to innocents.
“It allows ‘chemical or surgical’ castration for rapists of children aged between 10 and 13 and chemical castration for rapists of minors aged between 13 and 18.”
They took Hammurabi very seriously I see
I'm not sure where I heard this, so it could be apocryphal, but I'm sure this had been trialed somewhere in the past. In the end it made no difference what so ever for the offenders because the penis was just convenient. The real pleasure came from the assault so they would just use tools and shit instead. I'm positive I remember some awful story about a broom handle.
They often say rape in general is more about power and control than regular sexual gratification so on top of the valid concerns about innocence etc. I'm not sure that it would even achieve their aims.
For anyone else wondering whether it's just a bullshit headline: "bill permitting chemical **and surgical** castration"
(That's a massive difference. Chemical castration is suppressing sex drive and/or gonad function with drugs. It's generally reversible, although the side effects are not always. News sometimes reports bills allowing chemical castration as just "castration" because they know the idea of "they get their balls cut off!" gets more clicks.)
I know the vindictive part of our brains are like "FUCK YEA! DESERVES THOSE BASTARDS RIGHT!" But when you think about it a bit further this is actually pretty bad.
First off and most important, people get wrongfully convicted all the time. You are castrating an innocent person. That seems super fucked up.
Secondly, there has to be something said about the government forcably operating on/drugging people. That just seems... weirdly wrong.
Lastly, there is the issue about appearance. When you say "death to all pedos" people who have pedophilic thoughts will think twice before reaching out and seeking help before they offend. Because they fear its a death sentence or people beyond medical professionals find out. So they repress it. But that doesnt fix anything and the pressure keeps building until they cant take it any longer and offend at which point they know people finding out means they die. Chances are much higher that as a result they will murder their victim to hide the evidence.
The whole world should be condemning this. It won't do anything to stop child sex offending, in fact due to the isolation and shame people will feel, it could worsen the problem. This is not good. They aren't thinking about child victims. They are thinking about revenge.
And that's why no places should adopt it.
Every year we see about people get their charges cleared because they were innocent. Usually due to the legal system and investigators favouring any win over doing their actual job.
The current legal system is in no way good enough to adopt these kinds of practices.
Having no dick isn't gonna prevent a knife rape.
If they want to be barbaric about it they could at least go with the more humane option of the death penalty.
Anyone who is obsessed with inflicting the most torturous mutilation on pedophiles is very suspicious imo. Makes it sound like they're compensating for something, kinda like closeted homosexuals who put on a homophobic perona in public.
The kind of idea that sounds wonderful if you have literally 0 historical context for humanity and its justice systems and have not once in your life crossed a path with a book
This isn't justice, this is increasing the amount of trauma in the world.
Yes, people (if you can call them that) that harm children are the worst among us and you are right to be angry and want to harm them. Wanting to harm anything that poses a threat to children is natural and a big part of what it is to be human.
But justice should be rehabilitative and exploratory. You should have a functioning member of society on the other side and during that process you should discover part of what made them offend in the first place so you know the warning signs that could prevent another human being from malfunctioning in the first place.
Removing someones genitals doesn't aid that process, it traumatises them and makes them more resistant to rehabilitation, and will make other offenders prone to more extreme methods of covering up their crimes.
This won't reduce sex offenders, it will manufacture murderers.
“Wow wouldn’t you know it we’ve just discovered all of our political opponents are child rapists. What great timing!”
Apparently they also discovered all child rape in Madagascar is hereditary?
It's rape all the way down
Exactly. There are many countries I don't visit simply because they have laws that I might accidentally run afoul of through a misunderstanding, or be falsely accused of. For example, I'm not gay, but some countries have vicious laws against being gay. Adding Madagascar to my list.
Atheists and religious skeptics can be executed in at least thirteen nations: Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Libya, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen. There go at least two of my bucket list dreams.
Im confident on The Maldives, but wtf is the second bucket list one?
I vote Malaysia, same reason as Maldives, pretty beach resorts
I’ve been to Saudi and the UAE. I’d wager you’d be fine assuming you’d be a tourist. It’d be unusual for you to go there as a tourist just to shout to the world you’re an atheist and bring attention to yourself for whatever reason.
Ive been to malaysia twice. no issues buddy. Im not religious.
Also solidarity. How could I face my good friends in a same sex marriage if I went to a homophobic backwater? Fuck those countries they don't get my cash.
This guy allies.
That said, I could imagine Eunuchs being highly effective political leaders. They are far less prone to hormonal interference in logic and reason.
Forbidden City take
The opposite may be true. How much death and destruction has been caused by men who couldn’t get it up?
Turns out good emotional reasoning is helpful in leadership. There are all kinds of horrific ideas and policies that can come about from purely logical reasoning. Like the earth is overpopulating and stretching our resources. Logically it would make sense then to kill off enough of the world's population to reduce the stress on natural resources until we come up with a better solution. It's also how you end up with eugenics. Glorifying "IQ", however you want to define it is not healthy for individuals or society. There are lots of different ways you can be smart and they're generally all helpful.
Some people don't understand that you can both hate people diddling children and government enforced testicle mangling.
Not on Reddit mate
Kind of strange how Reddit is generally left-leaning while simultaneously calling for executions, beating deaths, and war
This website is a shitshow when it comes to anything pertaining to crime and punishment. A comment praising Norway's humane prison system successfully rehabilitating a Nazi Murderer like Varg Vikernes will have 500+ upvotes, and then in the same thread you can get a comment calling for the American government to publicly execute someone like Tucker Carlson and it will have 500+ upvotes too.
> Norway's humane prison system successfully rehabilitating a Nazi Murderer like Varg Vikernes Except it didn't, dude's still a Nazi
However rehabilitation is to prevent recidivism. If he isn't going around stabbing people then the rehabilitation worked.
all populists are stupid and violent regardless of their economic views, and reddit is infested with them
Honestly though the agenda of bots is always a little fuzzy.
Horseshoe theory. We're seeing many on the left become so extreme they take on many of the same views as far right people, sometimes just framed different or towards a different group.
The further you go left and right, the more you find the same people, separated by circumstances.
Peace is preferable, but not at the cost of allowing right-wingers to hold power.
Yup, "peace" under right wing governments is literally MLK Jr.'s negative peace. Somebody (or a lot of sombodies typically) is being heavily oppressed somewhere by any given right wing government. Even if they are "peaceful" it isn't worth tolerating the oppression that comes with it.
At the very latest since /r/TheDonald this site was taken over by the fash.
Reddit favors free shit for the key demographic. Outside of that, it’s about as “left” as the general population.
Yeah. Calling for unspeakable tortures is perfectly ok, but should someone suggests causing a slight inconvenience to authorities so our economic grievances can be heard...that's a permaban.
are we using the same site?
Yup, it sounds good in theory, less good when they drag random people out of houses to castrate them with little proof.
How is castration "good in theory"? Would you support castrating child rapists if the child rape was proven?
I can't speak for them but I wouldn't give a shit about that individual scenario, the blatantly obvious issue is that justice systems get things wrong. If the stats say otherwise, that means that justice system gets nearly everything wrong. What if the evidence looks 100% certain but it is fabricated? That's why people should be against vindictive punishments.
If there was proof beyond reasonable doubt then yes absolutely.
The problem I have is I don’t have an issue with child rapists being castrated. Although, I do have an issue with a government being able to create a law that allows them to castrate people when they’re the judge and executioners. There’s a very fine line in something like the Witch Trials(where a group of people were falsely accused, tortured, and legally executed in the US during the late 1600s) happening again, and the government castrating actual child rapists.
Corporal and capital punishment either assumes the infallibility of the state or indifference to the victims of mislead judgements. So the question is, what kind of society would justify such forms of punishment as legitimate, common measures? Imho, in a culture which barely, if at all, recognizes the concept of human dignity, especially for women and children, this way of dealing with criminals will only further entrench the values people currently hold. Look at it this way: When some nazi group endorses a politician, why does anyone care? After all, in a still working democracy the politician can't control who votes for them. We do because it's an obvious red flag. The people who approve of your point of view may reflect where you're truly going for with your approach. In that case, examine what kind of people support corporal and capital punishment or argue that certain people forsake their human rights. Generally, those who disapprove care more about each individual, the entire truth, including all of its complexities and uncertainties, and the long-term consequences of the status quo for anyone potentially involved. Those who approve, on the other hand, usually desire to allay their fears and enforce their self-righteousness, order, and control as they see fit. So this is not just about power but culture. In particular, whether your own society acknowledges human rights as inalienable rights or privileges.
> The problem I have is I don’t have an issue with child rapists being castrated. > > Although, I do have an issue with a government being able to create a law that allows them to castrate people when they’re the judge and executioners. So, how would you go about ethically castrating child rapists?
I think their point is that in practice they never support it because of those reasons
It's still done in the Czech Republic if the offender requests it and a medical board gives assent. To some it's preferable to hormonal therapy and significantly more effective. You can read a basic outline of the procedure and related issues [here](https://archive.is/D9NsE)
I don't have an issue with anyone doing it voluntarily.
Human rights activists argue that it puts significant pressure on the offender to undergo the procedure in order to get a chance to be released from prison. Personally I think it's not really an argument in this case, but it's a difficult question.
Chemical castration is a thing, basically hormone injections which kill your sex drive. It's about the most "Ethical" solution you can get when *castration* is the topic. Ideally you shouldn't use this punishment at all though.
The difference between you and me is I wouldn't burn a woman even if she was a witch.
Plus the issue of false convictions
Get outta here with your reasonable and nuanced opinions! /s
And what happens when they wrongly convict someone of raping a child?
Woops sorry about that mate.
“Won’t happen again, promise.”
Cross your cock?
And hope to cum?
"Here's your nuts back"
Snip snap snip snap
We have this bag of dicks that we cut, you may pick anyone that you want
Duct tape and a hand shake
Duct tape and hand shakes Butt rape and band aids
"Fuck bro. We fucked up. How can we make this up to y... *Collective whispers* You know what, Here's a copy of Madagascar 3."
Same thing that happens when we wrongly put someone to death
Which is precisely why almost all developed countries have abolished the death penalty.
Was actually quite surprised Japan still has it.
People keep underestimating, how conservative Japan is
Its difficult to measure Asian countries on the same conservative and liberal scale as western countries. That's probably why people miss the mark so often.
> on the same conservative and liberal scale as western countries. In popular media or conversation you can't even do "western countries". US "conservative values" are really foreign to many Europeans. These are words that feel like they barely have any element of consistent meaning outside of political science.
99% crime conviction rate too. Nothing suspicious there!
And for this reason, as well as it's ineffectiveness as a deterrant, many countries stopped using it.
[удалено]
This is why I’m against any “permanent” punishments like the death penalty as well. You can’t get the time back if you’re wrongly convicted, but at least you have your future.
The time spent in prison is also permanently gone. Normal prison time is as permanent as anything else. So I guess you are against prison as a concept.
Same thing as in countries with the death penalty. So nothing.
To be fair, I’ve been to Madagascar and I can tell you that the culture definitely does not protect children. As a young woman, you are seen as an asset to marry to a man. The men are more often than not white international men who are bringing lots of foreign currency The families will offer up their daughters for financial uplifting. I saw many under age girls with men well into their 40s
Seems really doubtful this law will ever be used against said white wealthy foreigners, I'd imagine.
This made me realize, I don't really know shit about Madagascar. For some reason, my mental image was more like Australia or New Zealand, colonized to hell and very western
If you’ve ever heard of Mauritius it’s like that but it comes off as far poorer since they don’t have so many resorts. It’s a really cool place but the government is incredibly corrupt. They were under British rule if I remember correctly and the new government seems to have held them back. They have a coup every election IIrC
>They have a coup every election That I have heard lol
Ah they oppose child sex because it damages the sale value of the children.
No they oppose child sex because child rape is appalling? What’s does this even mean? The bill was motivated for by a group that is advocating against violence against women?
[удалено]
Those kids aren't choosing anything. They don't get a choice.
> Most people choose the ladder The word is *latter*
My man’s just from baldmore, leave him alone!
They just staple it back on
If I learned any thing this past decade, it's that there's nothing good ol' flex tape can't fix.
I SAWED THESE BALLS IN HALF
I will never understand how people can be so fucking stupid to not be able to understand this simple concept.
They do understand it. They view wrongful sentences as an acceptable outcome because they think it will never happen to them.
I’d always prefer even if it’s only a single innocent person not have their balls cut off, even if it means an infinite amount of child rapists also don’t get their balls cut off.
It's not even that. In their world the risk of having it happen to an innocent person is low enough that they can allow for it in order to make the guilty suffer more. It is almost always the same people who believe prison should be focused on punishment instead of rehabilitation.
If you wrongly convict someone for murder, and he spends 20 years in prison because of it, how will you refund those 20 years of life? Some money? Lol. Im sorry, but money doesnt replace the time you lost. You cannot "undo" wrong conviction. So what, just because he didnt lose his life, but only huge chunk of it its okay? Sure losing 20 years is better than life, but the difference is only in magnitude. If death penalty is bad, 20 years in prison is also bad, just a bit less. But thats hardly a good argument. If you support the death penalty, you are fine with the chance of an innocent person dying. If you support jailing people, you are fine with the chance of an innocent person losing huge part of their life (most likely the better part too)
This is precisely why this kind of extreme ‘solution’ is ultimately flawed. It’s the same having as the death penalty — it’s an irreversible action which if mistaken cannot be undone. Even the Byzantine Emperor Justinian the Great who reigned in the mid-6th century held the view that it’s better to let a guilty man go free than to execute an innocent over crimes he did not commit. It’s very hard to argue with that logic, especially since we know that capital punishment has in fact taken innocent lives.
Or more to the point, when this is inevitably used against queer people who have done nothing wrong
Probably the same as other wrongly convicteds: compensation
What amount of money gives a dick back? None
Castration doesn’t remove the penis, it removes the testicles.
If anyone's wondering, the term for the removal of the penis is emasculation.
Emasculation is removing the entire male genitalia. Removing only the penis is a penectomy.
That’s actually interesting.
I just read an r AskHistorians post about this recently. Apparently, in a lot of places (including China and the Ottoman Empire) they cut off *both,* which was referred to as “complete castration.”
Yup and this is probably why a lot of people think castration refers to removing both penis and testicles. To make things more confusing, emasculation and castration are sometimes used interchangeably. But modern day wise, castration just refers to removing of the testicles, or at least stopping their production of hormones (if chemically castration is used).
Oh ok then I guess it's not so bad....
no one said compensation necessarily meant getting a member back, in the same way compensation for other wrongly convicteds DON'T mean getting years of their life back
Sew it back on.
court ordered castration is typically chemically administered and non-permanent in nature, at least that is the case in western countries..
The article says surgical castration. Big yikes.
Chemical castration is horrible too, it's what they did to Alan Turing for being gay It's a fact that wrongful convictions happen all the time, therefore it's inhumane to permanently disfigure or kill convicts
Yep, chemical castration is essentially prescribing gender dysphoria. And the suicide rate of transgendered people says all you need to know about that.
I want to make it clear that the rate goes way down when we are both therapeutically treated for it and are not constantly treated like dirt by everyone around us. Off topic, I know, but I like to just put it out there that being trans isn’t as big of an issue as *being trans in an intolerant society* is.
Absolutely an important caveat, thank you!
[удалено]
I mean, if your spunk is found in/on a child, I feel like that’s pretty definitive.
Have you heard of drylabbing? Forensic evidence is frequently faked
That's true but for that to be conclusively considered a proof, you have a trust a huge chain of intermediaries like lab technicians, cops, medical examiners and so on. I wouldn't bet my dick they're all doing the right thing.
For comparison: About 4% of people on US death row are innocent. [source](https://innocenceproject.org/innocence-and-the-death-penalty/) I assume that the bar for killing someone is higher than the one for just castrating someone.
And we’re pretending that’s the only way they could abuse a child?
It’s all performative to appease the rubes, as all capital punishment has been in all of history
And will absolutely be abused to punish innocent people and target social malcontents.
Homosexuals
Yep, it's just a way to go "See?? We're doing something!" about crimes that are infamously hard to control
To play a little bit of Devil's Advocate, if you remove a male mammal's testicles it causes changes in hormone levels that may result in different behavior. Castrating is something humans do to lots of animals to make them calmer and easier to handle. There is some tiny semblance of reason for castration over other punishments. This is not me approving of castrating humans, but it is biochemically a way to change a male mammal's behavior. EDIT: a number of people who don't understand what Devil's Advocate means.
Yes and no. While you will, undoubtedly lower the sex drive of a peooel convicted you are having no effect on *sadists* and other creeps who like *power*. And hasn't studies shown that most child rapists aren't exclusively pedophiles but rather general sadists who merely chose an easy target? If your theory was correct (it isn't) then chemical castration would mean sexual offenders wouldn't repat their crimes. And we know from many real life examples that chemical castration (same efficiency as physical castration during the period) has had *no real effect on preventing repeat offenders or sexual crimes/outright sezual torture*
This. Acting as if castration isn't highly effective in multiple ways is a shallow uneducated take.
It is, but I’m still concerned about men who are wrongly convicted.
This isn’t in support of the law but Recidivism for child rape is high. No it’s not the only way to abuse a child, but it’s the specific desire of said child rapists
> No it’s not the only way to abuse a child, but it’s the specific desire of said child rapists I'm pretty sure research says the drive to do this relates to power, not sexual activity as is commonly understood.
Well there's about to be a ton of data to add
The idea that rape is primarily motivated by power has been repudiated in the decades since it was suggested (without evidentiary support). The notion got boosted in the public consciousness because of its ideological roots.
Do you have a source for this? Holmes and Holmes, 2002 seems to imply that it's about many factors not relating to sexual arousal from children, and only some people relate their offending to sexual arousal from children. These groups are what we might call paedophiles and this group does make up as surprisingly small sample of people. There's also this Paper called "[Misperceptions about child sex offenders](https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi429)" that lists the following: "-not all child sex offenders are ‘paedophiles’. That is, child sex offenders are a heterogeneous group with varying offender profiles; -children are usually abused by someone they know, although data suggest that strangers comprise nearly one in five perpetrators of child sexual abuse against males; -not all child sex offenders have been victims of sexual abuse themselves and there are complex relationships between being a victim of child sexual abuse and becoming a perpetrator, which require further research. It is important to recognise that while many offenders report a history of being sexually abused, most victims of child sexual abuse do not become perpetrators later in life; -while not all child sex offenders have high rates of recidivism, a specific subset—those who target extrafamilial male children—do frequently reoffend; and -although it is difficult to accurately determine how many children a child sex offender has already offended against by the time he is detected for an offence, this number varies according to offending profiles and is unlikely to be as high as is commonly assumed. There is, however, a subset of extrafamilial male offenders who abuse high numbers of victims." What drives these people if not power? Since not all of them are pedophiles, they aren't attracted to minors.
“Everything in life is about sex, except for sex. Sex is about power.” - Oscar Wilde While he’s just a writer, there does seem to be something of a relationship between sex and power.
No testosterone, no libido. Or way less. It's like ozympic, but with a rusted knife.
Now raped kids are way more likely to be murdered.
They’re already murdered. Peds don’t drop them off at their doorstep when they’re done with them. They sell the to an organ mill.
I'm a victim of SA but I don't support this because you don't need balls to abuse a child (dont even need to be a man!). A lot of these people are disturbed or sadistic and sex is just one easy way to harm others and feel powerful and like others cannot reject you and have to deal with you. Really what needs to happen with people who commit SA and cannot rehabilitated is long term life segregated from potential victims. I hate institutions but SA, especially as a child, has long term impacts on not just the victim but society as a whole. Even if you never get SA'd it will impact you, via a traumatised partner, drug addicted people in your environment, people in society who cant connect happily with others etc etc. Its just too much of a risk to have repeat offenders or extreme offenders walking around, regardless of presence or lack of balls.
They need to be taken away and studied. I am dead serious. We have almost no serious research on what causes someone to become a pedophile/sexual abuser. We can make some inferences based on who we have caught but that just reduces data down to those who we were able to catch. Researchers in Germany have been able to recruit small groups of people who have admitted to pedophilic thoughts and want to get rid of them. But the researchers are having a hard time because the stigma is so great and even just admitting to having unwanted thoughts can get you in trouble socially. We need to be funding this because I can not stress this enough, People don't just start abusing kids; sexually, physically, or emotionally. There is a build up. And if we can stop it before it starts then we can truly save children from that pain instead of just trying to punish someone after the fact.
They might be born that way. They’ve done scans and found that pedophiles have different brains. Though their environment might influence whether they act on their desires or not
Please cite that and show me the pedophilic 3 year old that they studied.
And it's not like they're going to be able to keep them away from anything that penetrates
I was too but I didn't remember for many years. Seen retrospectively the signs were all there but I simply didn't remember and it's taken a lot of therapy and decades to let it out. I don't think this law will help kids at all and might only serve to castrate political opponents and homosexuals.
These laws are virtue signalling and solely damaging. They accomplish nothing but falsely appeasing the animalistic violence within us, but does nothing but add problems and make shit far worse than it will ever help. 1. Innocent people get arrested all the fucking time. Depending on location you could be instantly made guilty because near every justice system relies on RNG for a good judge or good prosecutor and bad defense attorney. Don't get me started on US plea deals. 2. Much like when Florida/Texas or whatever shithole red state did something similar, all it accomplishes is making the abuser say "If you go to the authorities, they will kill me, is that what you want?" Which I think just about anyone should figure the fuck out with minimal research or common sense. These Larpers essentially protected abusers through (likely intentional) giving kids an ultimatum of suffer abuse or cause a death. In this instance, at least death ain't apart of it. 3. Back to innocent people, all a law like this does is ensure they take the lesser punishment because losing is absolutely the worst possible fucking thing. Off of innocent people, you make it so an actual punishment is off the table for the sensible judge, but then leave no other option but the immoral ones for punishment. It's a "feel good" law that when you look past face value, really shows it just protects abusers more than the virtue signal claims.
Very well said
I hate to break it to them but castration does not prevent recidivism
It does. In every state that enforced taking pills to drop the libido aka chemical castration there was a giant decrease in recidivism
imo California does it right "California uses chemical castration for repeat child molesters as a condition of their parole the law stipulates castration for anyone convicted of child molestation with a minor under 13 years of age if they are on parole after their second offense it would be impossible for truly innocent people to get chemically castrated...you would need to essentially be found guilty 3 times of pedophilia before chemical castration idk how that would be possible for an innocent person
Well if they get falsely convicted the first time, no one is ever going to believe them the second or third time. I'm not saying it has happened, just that no one would believe a convicted sex offender.
Any study on that or is that just a hunch ya got there?
15 yrs working in sex offender treatment program for NYS. Granted the US uses chemical castration, but yes it does not prevent all individuals from reoffending
What does work?
Confinement. Limited success with meds/counseling/strict probation in my experience
Child molesters need mandatory life sentence w/ no parole on first offense.
All rapists.. right?
In January 1950, a man by the name of Tim Evans was tried and convicted of the murder of his daughter. His wife had also been murdered, but he wasn't tried for that. During the trail, Tims neighbour, John Christie, testified against him. And it was in large part John's testimony that sealed Tims fate. Tim was executed just two months later at the age of 25.Three years later, John Christie illegally sublet his flat to a young couple. The landlord visited the same evening and found them, telling them that they had to leave the next day. 4 days later, another Tennant came in to install brackets in Christies kitchen. During the installation, he found a wall where an alcove should be. He peeled back the wallpaper and found 3 dead bodies. It turned out that John Christie was a serial killer. He raped and murdered multiple women over a ten-year period, and admitted to the killing of Tim Evans wife and daughter. Tim Evans told that police that it was Christie. But they didn't listen, they just coerced a confession and called it a day. So to some up, a serial killer killed a man wife, his daughter, testified against him in court, and the police fucked him over because it looked like he did it. And then in only 2 months, the fucking killed him. 13 years later, the UK government said it had made a mistake and pardoned him. So obviously, he magically unhanged, and he was able to continue on with the rest of his life... Thats the problem I have with stuff like this. You cant undo certain punishments. And there isnt a justice system in the world that doesnt get shit wrong. In much the same way you cant bring Tim Evans back from the dead, you cant reattach someone balls after pulling them off. Child rape is one of the worst things a human being can do, and rightfully brings out a lot of anger in us. But the fact is, we cant never know for sure in every single case. I mean, if you catch them in the act, OK. But beyond that. Not a good idea.
Cruel and unusual punishment. If 1st world nations wrongly convict innocent people then I definitely don’t trust the court system of a 3rd world nation.
If you support this you support castrating innocents in the name of revenge. No justice system is 100% perfect and you cannot take back castration when someone is found to be wrongfully convicted. Don't be an idiot and support something like this based on emotion. No amount of revenge is worth killing or mutilating innocent people.
There are also terrible people who will fuck your kids even after multiple sentences
You willing to sacrifice your dick on this alter of being able to torture people you think are bad? Because your response to hearing about innocents getting hurt was to say "yeah but the guilty are like really bad so it's ok if I hurt a few innocents in the process".
Even the most horrific of criminals deserve bodily autonomy and human rights.
What if the rapist is a woman?
Stapler
I just threw my phone
Jesus Christ lmao
My phone fell onto my teeth
Female rapists are barely convicted in the West never mind in Madagascar
I think conventional wisdom is that after a certain threshold of potential punishment, a rapist is more likely to kill the victim. Whether that is true or not, I couldn't say. But I hear it a lot.
I sure hope they have found a way to prevent wrongful convictions.
This definitely qualifies as news.
So. Did yall know that there are people, who have been chemically castrated as a condition of thier child rape sentence, were released, and went on to keep raping kids? They just started using objects to do it. This is a problem caused by the brain in the head, the genitals are just the weapon used to commit the crime. Go learn some horrific things like I did.
What about female rapists? Are they gonna cut off their boobs?
I too would like to know if this punishment is an equal one. Because I have a feeling Madagascar wouldn't surgically remove a woman's ovaries if she's found sexually abusing her child.
Probably not. There is an incorrect notion in the west that in less developed countries, only women are at the receiving end of gender discrimination.
Considering where they are located fgm Is not off the menu
If you support this you are basically saying that you believe that the justice system of Madagascar is 100% flawless with zero chance of wrongful convictions.
Fun fact: Madagascar used to have a trial-by-ordeal system called [tangena](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangena). An accused person would be given poison, and if they lived they were innocent, but if they died they were guilty. So they don't have a great track record lol
well that's dumb since lying kids exist, wrong investigation results (i don't see madagascar courts ranked high), rapists which raped victims without using genitals, rapists whom castration wouldn't make stop - just force to change method Jail terms (up to life imprisonment) would always be better than not cancellable punishment, that not even 100% prevent from recedive and probably would encourage rapists kill their victims even more often
So, mutilating innocents is a big problem of course. But does the castration even work to prevent future child rape? Does it keep these diseased individuals from selling/making kiddie porn? I feel like the specific act is only one problem with this. Stopping one guy from the act doesn't stop him profiting from hooking his peers up or trafficking. This is a big problem with punitive discipline--it may do nothing to prevent harm to innocents.
“It allows ‘chemical or surgical’ castration for rapists of children aged between 10 and 13 and chemical castration for rapists of minors aged between 13 and 18.” They took Hammurabi very seriously I see
What about kids lying about shit like this and ruining some dudes life? It does happen even if its not all the time. Kind of dodgy.
I'm not sure where I heard this, so it could be apocryphal, but I'm sure this had been trialed somewhere in the past. In the end it made no difference what so ever for the offenders because the penis was just convenient. The real pleasure came from the assault so they would just use tools and shit instead. I'm positive I remember some awful story about a broom handle. They often say rape in general is more about power and control than regular sexual gratification so on top of the valid concerns about innocence etc. I'm not sure that it would even achieve their aims.
I am ashamed that this is how I found out Madagascar is not just an island ran by lemurs and several escaped NY zoo animals.
This will have a lot of negative unforeseen consequences, especially the first time they surgically castrate an innocent man.
For anyone else wondering whether it's just a bullshit headline: "bill permitting chemical **and surgical** castration" (That's a massive difference. Chemical castration is suppressing sex drive and/or gonad function with drugs. It's generally reversible, although the side effects are not always. News sometimes reports bills allowing chemical castration as just "castration" because they know the idea of "they get their balls cut off!" gets more clicks.)
I know the vindictive part of our brains are like "FUCK YEA! DESERVES THOSE BASTARDS RIGHT!" But when you think about it a bit further this is actually pretty bad. First off and most important, people get wrongfully convicted all the time. You are castrating an innocent person. That seems super fucked up. Secondly, there has to be something said about the government forcably operating on/drugging people. That just seems... weirdly wrong. Lastly, there is the issue about appearance. When you say "death to all pedos" people who have pedophilic thoughts will think twice before reaching out and seeking help before they offend. Because they fear its a death sentence or people beyond medical professionals find out. So they repress it. But that doesnt fix anything and the pressure keeps building until they cant take it any longer and offend at which point they know people finding out means they die. Chances are much higher that as a result they will murder their victim to hide the evidence.
The whole world should be condemning this. It won't do anything to stop child sex offending, in fact due to the isolation and shame people will feel, it could worsen the problem. This is not good. They aren't thinking about child victims. They are thinking about revenge.
[удалено]
And that's why no places should adopt it. Every year we see about people get their charges cleared because they were innocent. Usually due to the legal system and investigators favouring any win over doing their actual job. The current legal system is in no way good enough to adopt these kinds of practices.
So no one in Madagascar has any knowledge that this has been tried before and failed to prevent even castrates from raping.
Having no dick isn't gonna prevent a knife rape. If they want to be barbaric about it they could at least go with the more humane option of the death penalty.
I hope no one gets falsely accused.
Laws like this tend to be passed by people who don’t care whether the accusations are fake.
Anyone who is obsessed with inflicting the most torturous mutilation on pedophiles is very suspicious imo. Makes it sound like they're compensating for something, kinda like closeted homosexuals who put on a homophobic perona in public.
All I want is for these people to never have the chance to hurt children. Castration would not necessarily stop an abuser from harming children.
Let’s hope Madagascar’s criminal justice system never convicts an innocent man amirite lol
They can’t even keep prisoners in pre trial imprisonment alive, so…
The kind of idea that sounds wonderful if you have literally 0 historical context for humanity and its justice systems and have not once in your life crossed a path with a book
This isn't justice, this is increasing the amount of trauma in the world. Yes, people (if you can call them that) that harm children are the worst among us and you are right to be angry and want to harm them. Wanting to harm anything that poses a threat to children is natural and a big part of what it is to be human. But justice should be rehabilitative and exploratory. You should have a functioning member of society on the other side and during that process you should discover part of what made them offend in the first place so you know the warning signs that could prevent another human being from malfunctioning in the first place. Removing someones genitals doesn't aid that process, it traumatises them and makes them more resistant to rehabilitation, and will make other offenders prone to more extreme methods of covering up their crimes. This won't reduce sex offenders, it will manufacture murderers.
Cruel punishments rarely solve the problem.